LD Munich, March 18, 2025, Order On Preliminary Objection, UPC_CFI_339/2024

1. Key takeaways

Neither the alleged incompatibility of the UPCA with EU law nor the alleged violation of the right to a lawful judge constitutes a valid ground for a preliminary objection.

According to Rule 19.1 RoP, a preliminary objection is strictly limited to the following formal procedural grounds: (a) the jurisdiction and competence of the UPC, (b) the competence of the division, (c) the language of the Statement of claim. Therefore, the preliminary objection does not extend to reviewing the validity of the UPCA itself or the alleged violation of Art. 47 (2) EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and Art. 6 (1) of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The claimant is not required to prove the authority of the UPC representative (Art. 48 UPCA) for the withdrawal of an opt-out, unless the defendant contests it.